View Full Version : Hobbit movie
Anyone looking for the Hobbit movie to come? On Dec 13, I will have one opportunity to view this movie starting at 10pm and am considering doing so.
Share what to look for and your thoughts about the feasibility of making a movie of a book that I found quite hard to read.
The Storyteller
12-7-12, 9:31am
I played Bilbo Baggins for 5 years in a large scale, two hour touring puppet production of The Hobbit in the early 80s, so I am absolutely looking forward to this. I am also a big fan of the BBC series "Sherlock" and really like Martin Freeman, so it will be fun to see him as Bilbo.
I have always considered The Hobbit a better story than Lord of the Rings, but I am probably biased.
I just read a review that indicated it was to be a three part (three movie) production. Still think that I will try to see it at 10pm.
What has I gots in my pocketses?
Ticketses to see hobbitses at the local IMAX.
My Hannukah presentses, my precious.
I played Bilbo Baggins for 5 years in a large scale, two hour touring puppet production of The Hobbit in the early 80s, so I am absolutely looking forward to this. I am also a big fan of the BBC series "Sherlock" and really like Martin Freeman, so it will be fun to see him as Bilbo.
I have always considered The Hobbit a better story than Lord of the Rings, but I am probably biased.
How fun!!!
Our family had the tradition of seeing the LOTR movies in the big ol' Cinerama, in downtown Seattle, as a holiday thing. We made sure we read the books aloud to the kids before the movies came out, so they could form their own images.
To my utter delight, both now-young adult kids have said yes to The Hobbit as a part of our family get-together. It will be sooo fun! And, we're taking my nephew, so he can have connected family time with his cousins. He really needs, and deserves, the love.
I just read a review that indicated it was to be a three part (three movie) production. Still think that I will try to see it at 10pm.
Yes, this is too much for such a small novel, Tolkien fan though I am. Peter Jackson will bloat it with his favorite thing: Battles.
Gardenarian
12-10-12, 3:13pm
I am a huge Tolkien fan. I loved reading the Hobbit and LOTR. The movies I consider a separate thing, but I thought they were wonderfully done - not the way I perhaps pictured things, but beautiful never the less.
I am going to wait to see The Hobbit when the crowds to die down a bit because I don't like seeing a movie in a crowd - but it will be hard to wait!!
Even though I have all three LOTR movies on DVD, I may go see them again as they are being shown in many theaters this week.
Tolkien wrote a ton of backstory to his novels; there is enough material for a dozen movies (though I hope they keep the story line.) I think if Peter Jackson had known what a hit the movies would be he would have included the Tom Bombadil section of LOTR. Maybe he'll do it in the future!!
No such thing as too much Tolkien!
Laser_Cat
12-10-12, 4:53pm
You bet I can't wait to see it!! I'm in the same boat with you though Gardenarian I don't like seeing movies with a huge amount of people. I have a pet peeve against people who text in the theatre, there is nothing more distracting to me than the bliding glare of a blue screen coming from a smart phone! It just ruins the experience for me. I think I'm going to take the chance though and go see a matinee!! I can't wait!
I was pretty psyched to see The Hobbit and it was pretty good, but not quite up to my expectations. I saw it in 3D and the scenery, special effects and computerized graphics were really amazing. Maybe the story line was basically told in the earlier Lord of the Rings series as the tale seemed like more of the same. Dwarfs slaying orcs, Gandaulf pulling off some cool wizardry, and the Hobbit in and out of peril at every corner. All of which is not so bad. It just seemed like it needed a few new twists or something. I actually drifted off for a few minutes in the middle. Maybe I just wasn't in the right mindset that day? Good but not great was my take.
Anyone else see it?
We saw it on the 22nd, as a part of our family holiday gathering. It was fun. Saw it on 3D, on a big Cinerama screen. If it had not been for the kids, I likely would have waited till I could rent it & see it at home. Nonetheless, I am glad we did.
The next day, I took a 7 year old friend to see The Wizard of Oz at the Seattle Children's Theatre. WOW! Well worth the extravagant expense. I once did fundraising at SCT, and the quality of theatre matches any of the other mainstage theatres on town. It was magical...
I saw it with my family on Christmas Eve. I went along mainly to be a good sport - I really didn't want to see it. I read the book as a teen and liked it, but I have never wanted to re-visit the story as an adult. Well....I LOVED the movie! I took the book from my son's bookshelf, and I plan to read it again, along with the LOTR.
At first it bothered me that The Hobbit will be told in three films, but I don't see it that way now. I was thoroughly entertained and will gladly sit through, and pay for, two more films if they are as well done as The Hobbit.
I'm happy to be re-introduced to the stories. (And, yes, someone in the row in front of me txt'd during the movie. sigh. Fortunately it was quick, but the phone glare is distracting, even if the person thinks that cupping his hand over the screen blocks the light. It doesn't block the light.)
those of you who have seen it: what age children do you think it is appropriate for?
those of you who have seen it: what age children do you think it is appropriate for?
Depending upon their imagination & familiarity with the story, as well as their tolerance for brutality & pretty intense fight scenes, I'd say no younger than 8. Older if they are tender or easily scared by violence.
I would also say no younger than 8.
Our son is 4, and while friends of mine have taken their 4 yr old to this film (and others!), we know that it's too intense for our son. It's not th emovie itself, but the current movie experience -- surround sound that's very loud, a very dark theater (new thing since the advent of digital really), and of course the length and intensity of it all. He did great with The Muppets and does well with nature movies, but even animated films for kids freak him the heck out (and I nearly end up with my face clawed off).
Still, it's a great film. DH saw it on premeire night in 3d and 48 ffs (at midnight no less), then again with me in 2d at the normal frame rate. I don't do 3d, and I don't care about frame rates. LOL I wanted to see it in a normal film way. i loved it.
But it's definitely too intense for msot under 8, imo.
Though, i think a lot of families expose their children to these sorts of things too young.
I was pretty psyched to see The Hobbit and it was pretty good, but not quite up to my expectations. I saw it in 3D and the scenery, special effects and computerized graphics were really amazing. Maybe the story line was basically told in the earlier Lord of the Rings series as the tale seemed like more of the same. Dwarfs slaying orcs, Gandaulf pulling off some cool wizardry, and the Hobbit in and out of peril at every corner. All of which is not so bad. It just seemed like it needed a few new twists or something. I actually drifted off for a few minutes in the middle. Maybe I just wasn't in the right mindset that day? Good but not great was my take.
Anyone else see it?
I have to ask - have you read the book?
Yossarian
12-25-12, 10:23pm
Peter Jackson will bloat it with his favorite thing: Battles.
Agreed. I'm a JRRT fan, but after 10,000 CG orcs fall of the bridge I think it diminishes the achievements of the protagonists. What gets me is that it's not necessary. If our small band makes it past 100 orcs, it's an accomplishment. Fight your way past ten thousand and its well, kind of hokey. LOTR had a few of the same problems, just because you can make it happen in CG doesn't mean you should. Been a long time since I read the book but it seems to me there were some story line additions too. Still give it a B+.
I have to ask - have you read the book?
Many years ago, Tradd. I do not remember much of it. It would be worth a re-read some day. From the best I recall, the movie close to the book but with more Hollywood effects and action and less character development.
I'd probably agree with the B+ rating. I go to the theater about 3 or 4 times a year and it wasn't a big disappointment, just could have been better.
I just read the book again a few days ago. I cannot believe they are getting three movies out of it, even with all the backstory Tolkien wrote.
Much use of The Silmarillion, which my DSD said was the most boring book she'd ever attempted! The battle scenes go into some detail, as does the scene wth the trolls, and much of it is very funny. As are the arrivals of the dwarves; drawn out for charachter development & no small comic effect.
All in all, however, I am quite sure that the three parts are to milk this for the money maker it will no doubt be. Our species loves a good yarn.
I read The Simarillion. It *was* boring!
Been a long time since I read the book but it seems to me there were some story line additions too. Still give it a B+.
Most of the "additions" actually come from several other tolkien texts that deal with this material from different POV. Some are from the appendices, but The Quest of Erebor is in the Unfinished Tales and included in the annotated Hobbit is what provides a lot of the dwarf-perspective.
So, people who just read the hobbit in the "as is" version -- and might skip the forward and appendices, and also don't necessarily have ahold of the other materials, would see it as padding or adding to the story.
The other benefit that Jackson (et al) has, is access to Tolkien's notes in the writing, which isn't in final text, might have been included in other places down the track, or even in papers about the texts down the line as well. Sometimes he did that (academics, man, they do that stuff. weirdos! LOL)
So, they're actually working with A LOT of materials to tell the story.
Though, I agree that the goblin kingdom was. . . eh.
Yossarian
12-26-12, 9:10am
It's not that they aren't legit. Radagast, Saruman, Galadriel, and Azog are Tolkien creations, but I don't recall them playing much of a role in the Hobbit. Granted, I read the Hobbit 35 years ago, but I don't remember rabbit sleds or morgul blades in there either. Most of it is fine as back story, but Azog was much more than that, and he drove much of the plot in the orc and wargs chase dwarves meme that dominates a good stretch of the movie. I kind of liked the Rivendell council as creative backstory, but I think Azog changed the tone from the original.
I believe it was the son of Azog who was pursuing in the Hobbit -- but not in the hobbit book, in the appendices. For film purposes, they bundled into Azog since he was set up so nicely (rather than introducing two characters). The council, the bit about the necromancer (and the evidence), I believe is in Erebor as well (DH read it again today). Then, Radagast is simply "radagast the brown, radagast the bird tamer!" he was known to wander woods, particularly he green woods (where the elves lived) before it became Mirkwood (rise of necromancer). The rabbits were wholly created, but I think it fits with the characterization well enough.
The hobbit reads from the hobbit POV. The Hobbit movie is setting up a world using two sides of the story -- well, three -- Hobbit. Dwarf. Wizard (galdalf). He is the narrator of Erebor, so. . . yeah.
I read The Simarillion. It *was* boring! I just fiished re-reading it and yep, it was just as boring the second time (read it first 20 years ago but watched the extended version of LOTR last week and got curious about the Simarillion again). But it does put everything into great perspective and ties up a lot of loose ends so recommend it to any LOTR fans. Haven't seen the Hobbit yet but wasn't a fan of the book (more for children I thought) even though I am a huge LOTR books (and also movies) fan. Deciding if I should re-read the Hobbit before or after I see the movie as I don't remember much of it besides the "Road" song/poem or what ever it's called. "The road goes ever on and on...."
....I don't remember much of it besides the "Road" song/poem or what ever it's called. "The road goes ever on and on...."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE-vX9eU7hw
Thanks Alan - makes me want to go on a trip! Well, everything makes me want to go on a trip but those scenic paths in the video are giving me the hiking-jones!
It just doesn't seem/feel right that they made it into three movies and I can shake the feeling that they are simply trying to monopolize on the success of the first three films (from THREE individual books!). I think I'll wait for the dvds to come to my library. Maybe I'll re-read the book in the meantime.
I enjoyed that. Thanks Alan.:)
It's not that they aren't legit. Radagast, Saruman, Galadriel, and Azog are Tolkien creations, but I don't recall them playing much of a role in the Hobbit. Granted, I read the Hobbit 35 years ago, but I don't remember rabbit sleds or morgul blades in there either. Most of it is fine as back story, but Azog was much more than that, and he drove much of the plot in the orc and wargs chase dwarves meme that dominates a good stretch of the movie. I kind of liked the Rivendell council as creative backstory, but I think Azog changed the tone from the original.
LOL, how else are you going to pad out 1/3 of a 350 page children's book?
Gardenarian
1-9-13, 5:12pm
We saw "The Hobbit" and liked it very much - not up to the standard of LOTR movies, but very enjoyable. I wish they hadn't used 3D - I think it is gimmicky and will not age well, and the director puts in stuff simply to play the 3D card. Yeah, too much battle stuff. But the Dwarves chanting in Bilbo's house gave me the chills. The musical stuff is really good; I wish there was more of it in all the movies.
Thanks for posting the song, Alan! That is from one of my favorite albums, "Starlit Jewel" by Broceliande.
Much use of The Silmarillion, which my DSD said was the most boring book she'd ever attempted! The battle scenes go into some detail, as does the scene wth the trolls, and much of it is very funny. As are the arrivals of the dwarves; drawn out for charachter development & no small comic effect.
All in all, however, I am quite sure that the three parts are to milk this for the money maker it will no doubt be. Our species loves a good yarn.
I read the Silmarillion. I'm trying to understand what parts of this movie are from the Silmarillion? Did I cross over the texts and not remember correctly? I'm thinking of the movie and thinking of the added parts and not really coming up with Silmarillion scenes at all. In fact most of it I clearly remember from reading The Hobbit, just fleshed out.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.